ArticleThe Journal of cell biology1996
Visualization of CD2 interaction with LFA-3 and determination of the two-dimensional dissociation constant for adhesion receptors in a contact area.
Article in The Journal of cell biology, 1996. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 86 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
86 citing papers in PubMed, 231 citations in OpenAlex.
- Mixed-mobility supported lipid bilayers uncover the role of immobilized ICAM1 on T cell activation and immune synapse organization.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2026Article
- Mechanotransduction through T cell receptors: consensus, controversies and future outlooks.Experimental & molecular medicine · 2026Review
- SLAMF6 enables efficient attachment, synapse formation, and killing of HIV-1-infected CD4bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2025Article
- Quantitative Analysis of Protein-Protein Equilibrium Constants in Cellular Environments Using Single-Molecule Localization Microscopy.Nano letters · 2024Article
- Two-dimensional measurements of receptor-ligand interactions.Frontiers in molecular biosciences · 2023Review
- Fluorescence-Based Measurements of Two-Dimensional Affinity in Membrane Interfaces.Methods in molecular biology (Clifton, N.J.) · 2023Article
- Article
- Supported Lipid Bilayers and the Study of Two-Dimensional Binding Kinetics.Frontiers in molecular biosciences · 2022Review
- Interplay of receptor-ligand binding and lipid domain formation during cell adhesion.Frontiers in molecular biosciences · 2022Review
- Single-cell measurements of two-dimensional binding affinity across cell contacts.Biophysical journal · 2021Article
- Characterization of mechanisms positioning costimulatory complexes in immune synapses.iScience · 2021Article
- Bioengineering tools for probing intracellular events in T lymphocytes.WIREs mechanisms of disease · 2021Review
- A multiscale study on the mechanisms of spatial organization in ligand-receptor interactions on cell surfaces.Computational and structural biotechnology journal · 2021Article
- Cell-cell interfaces as specialized compartments directing cell function.Nature reviews. Molecular cell biology · 2020Review
- A dynamic CD2-rich compartment at the outer edge of the immunological synapse boosts and integrates signals.Nature immunology · 2020Article
- Coreceptors and TCR Signaling - the Strong and the Weak of It.Frontiers in cell and developmental biology · 2020Review
- Antibodies to Modulate Surface Receptor Systems Are Often Bivalent and Must Compete in a Two-Dimensional Cell Contact Region.CPT: pharmacometrics & systems pharmacology · 2019Article
- Binding equilibrium and kinetics of membrane-anchored receptors and ligands in cell adhesion: Insights from computational model systems and theory.Cell adhesion & migration · 2016Review
- Structural Basis for Simvastatin Competitive Antagonism of Complement Receptor 3.The Journal of biological chemistry · 2016Article
- Kinetic Measurements Reveal Enhanced Protein-Protein Interactions at Intercellular Junctions.Scientific reports · 2016Article
26 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Many adhesion receptors have high three-dimensional dissociation constants (Kd) for counter-receptors compared to the KdS of receptors for soluble extracellular ligands such as cytokines and hormones. Interaction of the T lymphocyte adhesion receptor CD2 with its counter-receptor, LFA-3, has a high solution-phase Kd (16 microM at 37 degrees C), yet the CD2/LFA-3 interaction serves as an effective adhesion mechanism. We have studied the interaction of CD2 with LFA-3 in the contact area between Jurkat T lymphoblasts and planar phospholipid bilayers containing purified, fluorescently labeled LFA-3. Redistribution and lateral mobility of LFA-3 were measured in contact areas as functions of the initial LFA-3 surface density and of time after contact of the cells with the bilayers. LFA-3 accumulated at sites of contact with a half-time of approximately 15 min, consistent with the previously determined kinetics of adhesion strengthening. The two-dimensional Kd for the CD2/LFA-3 interaction was 21 molecules/microns 2, which is lower than the surface densities of CD2 on T cells and LFA-3 on most target or stimulator cells. Thus, formation of CD2/LFA-3 complexes should be highly favored in physiological interactions. Comparison of the two-dimensional (membrane-bound) and three-dimensional (solution-phase) KdS suggest that cell-cell contact favors CD2/LFA-3 interaction to a greater extent than that predicted by the three-dimensional Kd and the intermembrane distance at the site of contact. LFA-3 molecules in the contact site were capable of lateral diffusion in the plane of the phospholipid bilayer and did not appear to be irreversibly trapped in the contact area, consistent with a rapid off-rate. These data provide insights into the function of low affinity interactions in adhesion.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.